The prevailing view(342,line 1):

The functioning of the human brain is same as the functioning of digital computers.
On this view, any physical system whatever that had the right program with the right inputs
and outputs would must have a mind.(342, P2 倒数部分)
Why we have not yet designed programs that can think?
It’s just a matter of time.(342 P3)

Author’s refutation(Not relevant with any particular stage of computer technology):

1. Programs are defined syntactically
2. Minds are semantical(Minds have certain sorts of contents)
e.g. If I am thinking about Kansas City or wishing that I had a cold beer to drink or
wondering if there will be a fall in interest rates, in each case my mental state has a certain
mental content. （343 P1）
Conclusion：Programs cannot have minds.
(The term syntax refers to grammatical structure whereas the term semantics refers to the
meaning of the vocabulary symbols arranged with that structure.)

Chinese room:
1. There’s a man in the room does not know any Chinese
2. But there’s a rule book in English manipulating all the Chinese symbols.
3. The rules specify the manipulation of the symbols purely syntactically(not semantically)
4. When some Chinese symbols are passed into the room, further rules are given for
passing back Chinese room.
5. By doing this, the person outside the room will think the person inside understand
Chinese, but actually he doesn’t.
6. What programs do are just like what the person inside the Chinese room do.
Conclusion: Programs cannot understand Chinese(any language).

Searle uses the case of “Chinese room” not only to prove that Programs cannot understand
any language, but also cannot have any mental states at all.

Some rejection:
1. The whole system understands
2. If the Chinese Room system is put into a robot, the robot will behave like it can
understand Chinese
All these rejections are again nullified by the distinction between semantics-syntax.

P345
342 最后一段

Now the point of the story is simply this: by virtue of implementing a formal computer program
from the point of view of an outside observer, you behave exactly as if you understood Chinese,
but all the same you don’t understand a word of Chinese. But if going through the appropriate
computer program for understanding Chinese is not enough to give you an understanding of
Chinese, then it is not enough to give any other digital computer an understanding of Chinese.
343 最后一段